Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: hueyone who wrote (63339)	3/15/2003 6:48:43 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 77400

Your statement doesn't refute my statement that it is not the FASB's job to decide who should get options, how many options are a good thing, and whether options are good or bad. Instead, you merely quoted a journalist who noted that the FASB dismissed arguments from the tech lobbies when the FASB voted to find a way to expense stock options on the income statements. I disagree- first of all, why were arguments about the amount of rank and file grants heard at all, if it isn't "FASB's job"?? Hueyone, I believe your previous post, the one where you initially pointed out that judgement calls about options grants, expensing, and pay were not the "FASB's job" to evalute, was another attempt to imply that this whole options issue is some objective determination that has no subjective component- that the FASB simply has to "execute the rules" and there is no judgement call whatsoever. This is a typical position of the options expensing crowd, to try to dismiss the obvious errors involved in determining a value for these things, (if there even is any value) ... and to imply that the entire exercise is just a long overdue technicality. I believe the entire motivation for options expensing is a kind of revenge for the excesses of the bad companies in the 90s who are now gone for the most part. Individuals feel "ripped off" and govt doesn't want it to happen again. THAT is the true motivation for options expensing and everyone knows it... it doesn't have its roots in some academic black and white ledger exercise, which is precisely why arguments about who gets stock options are being heard by the FASB at all. So I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, I do indeed believe that the FASB is making it its job to make a judgement call on excess and that is the outcome of all of this.